I would also prefer camelcase. See other places in Sling like https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/resource-merger.html <https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/resource-merger.html> or https://sling.apache.org/documentation/the-sling-engine/mappings-for-resource-resolution.html <https://sling.apache.org/documentation/the-sling-engine/mappings-for-resource-resolution.html>.
> On 14 Oct 2016, at 13:04, Carsten Ziegeler <cziege...@apache.org> wrote: > > Stefan Seifert wrote >> in  oliver mentioned the usage of property names in the current >> implementation: >> >> sling:config-ref >> sling:config-collection-inherit >> sling:config-property-inherit >> >> should we use headless camel case instead? is this more consistent with the >> other parts of sling? >> >> sling:configRef >> sling:configCollectionInherit >> sling:configPropertyInherit >> >> > As mentioned as a response to Olli camel case would be more consistent. > So if it is not too much work, we should change it. Otherwise I think it > is not that important. > > Carsten > > > > -- > Carsten Ziegeler > Adobe Research Switzerland > cziege...@apache.org >